Low-end Lumia 620 shows Nokia’s and Windows Phone’s scaling trouble

$249 for a Windows Phone 8 device is cheap, but is it cheap enough?

Today Nokia announced the Lumia 620, a range of colorful handsets running Windows Phone 8 that should have an unsubsidized cost of around $249. The phones will be released in the first quarter of 2013, initially in Asian and African markets and later in Europe and South America.

The 620 will be available in the four process colors (cyan, magenta, yellow, black) and white, and to these Nokia is adding two new colors: lime green and orange. These two colors use a new process Nokia calls "Dual Shot" in which two colors are layered on top of each other, which apparently creates "depth effects" and "textures." The lime green covers are a "dual shot" of yellow and cyan; orange, one assumes, is yellow and red.

The lime green phone appears to have a cyan glow to it, presumably as a consequence of the "Dual Shot" coloring.

Nokia

The Lumia 620 isn't Nokia's only low-cost Windows Phone play. First announced in October, the Lumia 510 went on sale in India yesterday. Rs. 10,499 (about $193) will get you a 4-inch 800×480 screen, a single core Snapdragon S1 processor running at an unspecified clock speed with 256MB RAM, 5 megapixel real/VGA front cameras, 4GB internal storage, 802.11 b/g/n (2.4GHz only, no 5GHz), Bluetooth 2.1 (not 3.0 or 4.0), and GPS (but no GLONASS)—running not Windows Phone 8, but rather Windows Phone 7.5.

The 510 range is available in red, yellow, cyan, white, and black.

The Lumia 510 range. Cheap, but are they cheap enough?

Nokia

Spec-wise, the 620 and 510 are about as low as Nokia can go when it comes to Windows Phone devices. The guts of the Lumia 510 are very mundane indeed. The problem for Nokia and Microsoft alike is that Android phones go lower still. For example, Huawei has just released an Android 4.0 handset in China called the T8830. Like the 510, it has a 4-inch 800×480 screen. It pairs this with a dual core 1GHz Cortex A9 processor (believed to be the Mediatek MT6517), 512MB RAM, and a 3.2 megapixel rear-facing camera. The cost appears to be about $110—a little over half the price of the Lumia 510.

Neither the Huawei phone nor the Lumia 510 run the current operating system version (though the Lumia is likely to be upgradable to Windows Phone 7.8, at least), but Android 4.0 is a lot closer to Android 4.2 than Windows Phone 7.5 and 7.8 are to Windows Phone 8.

Nokia needs cheap, low-end phones to be able to compete in the fast-growing African and Asian markets but at the moment, Windows Phone still can't match Android's pricing, leaving the Finnish company forced to stick with S40 (under the "Asha" brand) in these markets—despite how uncompetitive it is. And rather than improving the situation, Windows Phone 8 seems to have made the problem even worse, as it makes the bar for hardware specs even higher. $249 is a cheap smartphone in Western markets, but far too much to be competitive in emerging ones.

That's not to say that there's no place for more expensive phones in these markets. Nokia has also launched a variant of the Lumia 920 in China called the Lumia 920T. Nokia hasn't published a full spec for the 920T, but it's broadly similar to the 920: 4.5-inch, 1280×768 screen, Qi wireless charging, and so on and so forth. It has some important differences, however. It supports China's TD-SCDMA phone technology.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Plus system-on-chip used in the regular 920 doesn't support TD-SCDMA. To do that, Nokia has had to switch to the Snapdragon S4 Pro, and while the CPU portion is very similar to the S4 Plus, the GPU isn't—it's quite a bit faster.

As a result of this, China probably has the fastest, most powerful Windows Phone 8 device that money can buy.

Update: Although China Mobile claimed prior to the 920T's launch that it used a Snapdragon S4 Pro MSM8960T system-on-chip with the faster GPU, it appears that the company was in error, and that the actual handsets use the S4 Plus-class 8260A, meaning that their GPU is the same after all.

What kind of trolling headline is that. Does it actually reflect anything in the article or have any resemblence with reality? You list an unsubsized price to a mostly american audience to whom to you normally ALWAYS list subsidize prices. Why?

What kind of trolling headline is that. Does it actually reflect anything in the article or have any resemblence with reality? You list an unsubsized price to a mostly american audience to whom to you normally ALWAYS list subsidize prices. Why?

They're not talking about the US market. Normally they are.

Talking about the prices people, in the market discussed, actually pay makes the most sense to me. These would probably be subsidized as penny (or free) phones in the US.

What kind of trolling headline is that. Does it actually reflect anything in the article or have any resemblence with reality? You list an unsubsized price to a mostly american audience to whom to you normally ALWAYS list subsidize prices. Why?

These aren't phones for the US market. There are no subsidized prices.

What kind of trolling headline is that. Does it actually reflect anything in the article or have any resemblence with reality? You list an unsubsized price to a mostly american audience to whom to you normally ALWAYS list subsidize prices. Why?

They're not talking about the US market. Normally they are.

Talking about the prices people, in the market discussed, actually pay makes the most sense to me. These would probably be subsidized as penny (or free) phones in the US.

Actually, these kinds of phones are more likely to be sold for pre-paid in the US. When the Lumia 820 already is $49 at launch (and probably free after 1-2 months), then I don't see the Lumia 620 ever appearing on a carrier like AT&T.

Then again, Verizon said they would be offering a Windows Phone that's free on contract this year. With the 8S unlikely to appear in the US, this phone would probably be a good candidate.

What kind of trolling headline is that. Does it actually reflect anything in the article or have any resemblence with reality? You list an unsubsized price to a mostly american audience to whom to you normally ALWAYS list subsidize prices. Why?

These aren't phones for the US market. There are no subsidized prices.

I think the Lumia 620 is a respectable entry-level phone at an appropriate price, but maybe not suited to the market it's being targeted at. Instead of competing with truly bottom-end hardware for India and Africa and the like, why not sell it in first-world markets with second-tier and prepaid carriers? I could see the Lumia 620 doing quite well on Virgin Mobile and US Cellular and the like.

I grow increasingly tired of the negative windows phone reviews. I've had the Lumia 900 since April, and I've never had a moment where I wish it could do something that another device could. I've had blackberry, android and iPhone, and when it comes to a phone, it's works where it should the best. This is nothing more than another article that decreases a users confidence in trying the OS out. Everyone I know who has a WP7 device shares this opinion; Why not the media? Constantly portraying WP in a negative light is just wrong.

- It has a 4.5" screen (vs 3.8")- It has a dual 1.5ghz CPU (vs 1ghz)- It has 1GB ram (vs 512MB)- It has 8MP camera (vs 5MP)- It has 1080P video (vs 720P)- It has 16GB storage (vs 8GB)

The SGS2X is superior in every meaningful way. Why would you buy the Lumia 620?

You could say in the same way, Lumia 800/900 would be available in similar price range by the time 620 is released. But, the reason for 620 to exist is that the price will get lower and you will get the latest OS updates for atleast another year or so.

- It has a 4.5" screen (vs 3.8")- It has a dual 1.5ghz CPU (vs 1ghz)- It has 1GB ram (vs 512MB)- It has 8MP camera (vs 5MP)- It has 1080P video (vs 720P)- It has 16GB storage (vs 8GB)

The SGS2X is superior in every meaningful way. Why would you buy the Lumia 620?

Retort:-A smaller screen may be nicer for smaller hands in the Asian market.-WP is more efficient in operating than Android, so it doesn't need a faster CPU and ram-The camera on Nokia phones produces better contrast and depth, plus low light than the samsung-on all but the best monitors can 720p and 1080p resolution be distinguished, and definitely not when video chatting between mobile devices-Cloud storage. It's the new SD card.

I grow increasingly tired of the negative windows phone reviews. I've had the Lumia 900 since April, and I've never had a moment where I wish it could do something that another device could. I've had blackberry, android and iPhone, and when it comes to a phone, it's works where it should the best. This is nothing more than another article that decreases a users confidence in trying the OS out. Everyone I know who has a WP7 device shares this opinion; Why not the media? Constantly portraying WP in a negative light is just wrong.

This wasn't a review of a Windows Phone, it was commenting on the low-end pricing strategy for emerging markets in light of the competition.

Is it negative? Yes, because it's priced at almost *twice the price of competing products* for the market. You don't like it? Tough shit, Peter is reporting the facts here. Grow up.

- It has a 4.5" screen (vs 3.8")- It has a dual 1.5ghz CPU (vs 1ghz)- It has 1GB ram (vs 512MB)- It has 8MP camera (vs 5MP)- It has 1080P video (vs 720P)- It has 16GB storage (vs 8GB)

The SGS2X is superior in every meaningful way. Why would you buy the Lumia 620?

Objectively, it's hard to come up with a reason. Like you say, a Galaxy S2 priced at $250 (are they really that cheap off-contract?) demolishes the L620 in a back-to-back objective comparison. Subjectively, I prefer the Windows Phone user experience to Android, and I prefer the feel and style of Nokia hardware to Samsung.

All I can say is that the Android phone likely runs like utter shite on that hardware. I'm not sure MS is making a bad decision ensuring a minimum level of perf as they are. I also take issue with the idea that WP7.8 is somehow a larger downgrade from WP8 than Android versions are from each other. 99% of the apps work on both, and most of the new functionality is either under the hood and irrelevent to a new user, or dependent upon hardware that won't be in these cheap handsets.

Since I got my device I've had several people on either old smartphones or featurephones ask me what I plan to do with my Trophy. Clearly its seen as useful. When I figure out a way to hack the texts off of it I'll likely give it to someone who can use it.

How do the low-end Android perform when compared to 620/510? If they are performing poorly, the low-end lumia would be preferred even at a premium. Also, what about the update situation with these Android devices? atleast the 620 will keep getting updates for a while. Even 510 would get 7.8.

I think its more important to have more lumia options in the low-mid end with good performance than competing with very low end Android phones.

From what I can tell the RRP for the SGS2X is $369.99, which puts it far above the Lumia 620's before tax $250 price tag. I'm aware you can find the SGS2X for around $300 off contract but chances are they'll be similar good deals on the Lumia 620 if you know where to look.

- It has a 4.5" screen (vs 3.8")- It has a dual 1.5ghz CPU (vs 1ghz)- It has 1GB ram (vs 512MB)- It has 8MP camera (vs 5MP)- It has 1080P video (vs 720P)- It has 16GB storage (vs 8GB)

The SGS2X is superior in every meaningful way. Why would you buy the Lumia 620?

Objectively, it's hard to come up with a reason. Like you say, a Galaxy S2 priced at $250 (are they really that cheap off-contract?) demolishes the L620 in a back-to-back objective comparison. Subjectively, I prefer the Windows Phone user experience to Android, and I prefer the feel and style of Nokia hardware to Samsung.

According to Amazon unlocked Galaxy S2 handsets run > $400 with a MSRP of $799 (I didn't dig too deep) so comparing it to a $250 MSRP handset isn't exactly fair.

I think the Lumia 620 is a respectable entry-level phone at an appropriate price, but maybe not suited to the market it's being targeted at. Instead of competing with truly bottom-end hardware for India and Africa and the like, why not sell it in first-world markets with second-tier and prepaid carriers? I could see the Lumia 620 doing quite well on Virgin Mobile and US Cellular and the like.

I believe that is going to happen after the release in Asia and Africa. In US and Europe, it would be Free on contract (or) pre-paid and replace 710 (unless there's a 720 on the way).

What baffles me is that the 510 costs so much! Its hardware should, in theory, be just as cheap as the Android phones in that market. So I am left wondering how much of that is Nokia overhead versus newer companies, how much of that is Nokia wanting to make a better per-phone profit, and how much is Windows Phone licensing. (and what other difference there are)

- It has a 4.5" screen (vs 3.8")- It has a dual 1.5ghz CPU (vs 1ghz)- It has 1GB ram (vs 512MB)- It has 8MP camera (vs 5MP)- It has 1080P video (vs 720P)- It has 16GB storage (vs 8GB)

The SGS2X is superior in every meaningful way. Why would you buy the Lumia 620?

Picking a phone isn't about just raw specs. If nothing else, this is an old Android OS phone, versus a much newer Windows OS phone, which means we're totally comparing apples and oranges. The CPU and RAM differences might be irrelevant if the OS can make up the difference (not saying Windows Phone necessarily can, but iOS clearly can run very well with much less RAM and less CPU than Android). And maybe the user doesn't want to be stuck on Android 2.3--I definitely wouldn't.

For the record, I'm not a Windows Phone guy at all, I just think most phone spec wars are irrelevant. I'd be much happier on yesterday's iPhone 4 than your Galaxy S II X, even though from a spec perspective it's no competition.

I believe that is going to happen after the release in Asia and Africa. In US and Europe, it would be Free on contract (or) pre-paid and replace 710 (unless there's a 720 on the way).

I've been paying close attention to WP8 model releases and it looks like there's no Lumia 720. The 810/820/822 is filling the void as the second-tier Lumia for the US market after the flagship Lumia 920. I don't see much room in between the 620 and the 820, so I suspect there will be no Lumia 720.

You say that Android scales much lower but then interchangeably talk about hardware specs and price as the measure for "scaling".

Based on your 2 examples (510 vs Huawei), the screen is the same (WVGA). However, the 510 actually has half the RAM of the Android device which runs counter to the notion that WP7.8 is worse at scaling. Perhaps the argument is really that it runs on a cheaper SOC, but do we know for sure that the MediaTek SOC is what accounts for the price difference?

If not, it could be other things (such as a nicer shell) that account for that price difference.

1. Comparing two devices just announced on paper and declaring Windows Phone has a scaling problem is just plain stupid.

2. Chinese phone makers always seem to come up with the cheapest version possible that Nokias and Samsungs won't lower themselves into. It happened also with Windows 7.5 in the past. ZTE had an unbelievably cheap WP device compared to Samsung and Nokia WP devices, and maybe ZTE or Huewei will do that with WP8 as well? Does the author know for sure it won't happen? Title suggests he does, but the article doesn't explain how he came to conclusion. Go figure.

Is it just me or Peter Bright often takes huge step backward with every two steps forward with his articles? I don't know, I'm just getting very tired of seeing so much poor reporting in blogosphere these days.

- It has a 4.5" screen (vs 3.8")- It has a dual 1.5ghz CPU (vs 1ghz)- It has 1GB ram (vs 512MB)- It has 8MP camera (vs 5MP)- It has 1080P video (vs 720P)- It has 16GB storage (vs 8GB)

The SGS2X is superior in every meaningful way. Why would you buy the Lumia 620?

Because it doesn't run Android? For me that's a Very Good Reason to choose a phone. I absolutely detest Android. It's chaotic and not exactly userfriendly. About the only thing it has going for it is that I can buy something else.

Android is open source and is allowed to run on anything capable of booting it. Windows is a controlled platform with a baseline of hardware design to ensure a certain level of user experience. WP8 phones will never compete with Android for the low end because of this.

WP strategy should be to undercut the iPhone with the promise of a similar highly polished experience with more handset flexibility.

All I can say is that the Android phone likely runs like utter shite on that hardware.

Really? You think that Android isn't capable of running on a dual-core 1GHz processor and 512 MB of RAM? Especially when driving such a low-res screen? I've had 7" tablets running Android 4.0 on a single-core proc around that speed, and the same amount of RAM, and they ran rather nicely.

- It has a 4.5" screen (vs 3.8")- It has a dual 1.5ghz CPU (vs 1ghz)- It has 1GB ram (vs 512MB)- It has 8MP camera (vs 5MP)- It has 1080P video (vs 720P)- It has 16GB storage (vs 8GB)

The SGS2X is superior in every meaningful way. Why would you buy the Lumia 620?

Because it doesn't run Android? For me that's a Very Good Reason to choose a phone. I absolutely detest Android. It's chaotic and not exactly userfriendly. About the only thing it has going for it is that I can buy something else.

As long as you understand you're a minority on that. Most people would consider running Android to be a selling point, not a turn-off.

All I can say is that the Android phone likely runs like utter shite on that hardware.

Really? You think that Android isn't capable of running on a dual-core 1GHz processor and 512 MB of RAM? Especially when driving such a low-res screen? I've had 7" tablets running Android 4.0 on a single-core proc around that speed, and the same amount of RAM, and they ran rather nicely.

…Isn't WP8 much much more efficient, and probably much better for low end devices?

No, quite the opposite.

Can you link to a discussion of this, or at least give a quick quantification? Seems like it'd be an important issue in very price-sensitive markets, especially where the phone might well be the ONLY computer a user would touch.

All I can say is that the Android phone likely runs like utter shite on that hardware.

Really? You think that Android isn't capable of running on a dual-core 1GHz processor and 512 MB of RAM? Especially when driving such a low-res screen? I've had 7" tablets running Android 4.0 on a single-core proc around that speed, and the same amount of RAM, and they ran rather nicely.

I don't think JB can run in 512mb of RAM.

Perhaps not, but I'm sure Huawei's phone runs ICS without issue.

EDIT: Actually, I just Googled it, and apparently at least one manufacturer (ZTE) has pushed out JB updates to phones with 512MB RAM. So it's at least possible, though performance is anybody's guess.

Objectively, it's hard to come up with a reason. Like you say, a Galaxy S2 priced at $250 (are they really that cheap off-contract?) demolishes the L620 in a back-to-back objective comparison. Subjectively, I prefer the Windows Phone user experience to Android, and I prefer the feel and style of Nokia hardware to Samsung.

"Subjective" ain't gonna get Nokia and MSFT out of single-digit market share.

I'm just wondering how worth it is for Nokia/Microsoft to be chasing after Android in these emerging markets. Yes, those markets are experiencing rapid growth, but it's almost entirely in the low-end devices, where I'm guessing there's little profit. Plus, you have multiple vendors within the Android market pushing profits even lower. Not that Nokia is in any position to out Apple Apple, but I would think that as much as they've struggled over the last several years, they'd want to pull out of trying to provide phones for every market out there, and instead focus on a smaller spectrum. Maybe sell significantly fewer phones, but do so at a much higher profit margin, like Apple does, in comparison to Android phones.

I don't see a problem with WP devices currently being priced higher than low-end Android phones. I'm sure Nokia still expects Symbian and Series 40 devices to compete at the absolute lowest prices. You can call those "increasingly uncompetetive" if you want, but Nokia still sold like 82 million phones in Q3, so I don't think WP7.x or WP8 need to start picking up the slack on the low-end just yet.